Where does it give a specific age in the Bible? nm
Posted By: curious on 2008-11-03
In Reply to: Messiah-end times - Good Luck.
I would really like to see this scripture if you can refer me to it.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
I should have been more specific
Maybe "reformed' would have been a better choice. I would not consider the Southern Baptists mainstream anymore. There have been many changes in that denomination pushing it much further right, and it has changed a lot over the years.
Can you be more specific?
What is your impression of his "drug policies?" What poor black man ever went to jail for getting some doctor to forge prescriptions for him? It sounds like you are talking about someone caught dealing for personal gain (money), not because they were addicted. Most dealers don't use. I would say 95% of them don't use and less than that are addicted. So could you be more specific on what you think John McCain had to do with putting poor black men in jail for forging prescriptions or using political clout to get someone to forge them for them. Because that is what Cindy McCain did. I am just trying to understand here.
Could you be a tad more specific?
nm
Could you please be a little more specific?
nm
Could you please be a little more specific?
I am interested in how Obama smoked the Constitution (what's left of it) and just when he stood by while the flag burned? While you are at it, please provide your sources. Otherwise, I can't reply to the rest of your post since I gave my Magic 8 ball to my neighbor's little sister when I was 11 and never replaced my Tarot cards after my college roommate stole them back in ྈ.
How about being a bit more specific?
Medicare and Medicaid, but what I want to know is why bother to post if you can't back yourself up with a logical argument, examples, sources for your info or something....ANYTHING? Otherwise, these sweeping generalized predictions of failure are just more sour grapes cat calls.
Can you be more specific, please?
1. Exactly which "19th century" principles should the Republicans abandon or "modernize"?
2. What evidence is there that "evangelicals" are "running the party", please?
Thank you - and I hope you'll provide something cogent for discussion instead of supporting your talking-points with more talking-points, so that we can have a good discussion about this.
Could you be more specific? Or maybe . . .
you're talking about the part where he talked about his father being Muslim and you misunderstood that he said it was his religion. It would be most helpful if you could post the exact portion of that speech, please. I pretty much listened to the whole thing, and I don't believe there was any part in there where he professed to be Muslum.
No,actually, they are more specific in their bias...
they are definitely more biased toward the clintons than democrats in general. But it is obviously that the mainstream media are all Obama adorers. That's why I take what is reported there with a grain of salt. And if I want to know ANYthing about conservatives Fox is my only choice.
I am sure no one here can deny with a straight face that the mainstream media has a left bias. lol.
not specific enough to draw
an inference from your post. Vague.
I was trying not to be gender specific
Care to be more specific?..(sm)
You might want to look up his voting record before you go there.
That is not what I said. I will have to search for the specific case...
in this case, the school had a rule banning any kind of religious symbol. A girl wore a cross to school and she was told to take it off and not wear it again. The same school tried to ban a Muslim student from wearing a head covering on the same basis. The ACLU took the school to court (actually I think it was settled out of court) on behalf of the Muslim student to be able to wear her head covering. They did this without being hired by the Muslim student. They did not argue on behalf of the Christian girl at the same time. The Muslim got to wear the head covering but the other girl still could not wear the cross. That is what I am talking about. I did not say that the ACLU sought to ban it. I am saying that they took on the cause of the Muslim girl, but not the Christian girl. And to me, that is discrimination.
I don't know it to be a fact, but I think if that Christian girl specifically asked the ACLU to support her case they would have refused. The last thing the ACLU wants to do is argue on behalf of a Christian to practice Christianity, even in something so small as wearing a cross to school.
And yes, there are many schools who ban religious symbols because of that gross misinterpretation of the first ammendment...the free exercise thereof totally left out, and the words separation of church and state supplied, which do not even exist in the constitution.
The question was specific to marijuana
but frankly, I do not care what anybody else consumes. That includes maryjane, and so my vote is yes.
Not necessarily any specific speech
that changed the trend in Europe, but what those countries see happening in the US the last 6 months.
For decades, whenever there was trouble anywhere in the world, a natural disaster, an epidemic, an out-of-control dictator, a genocide, they could always count on the US to send money (more than any other nation), materiel and personnel to bail them out and fix the problem. Now the rest of the world sees our government bankrupting itself (Obama's mouth writing checks his wallet can't cover) and they must realize that they're going to be pretty much on their own from here on out. They have to get ready to take care of themselves, and rein in their own out-of-control governments.
Nope, not any specific speech he gave, but I think everyone in the EU must see the handwriting on the wall. They are starting to take measures to protect themselves. About time. It's just ironic that we are not moving into the place they are abandoning.
The specific issue is irrelavant to my point
I was in no way arguing the whole abortion issue. Passionate feelings on both sides. I'm staying out of that. What I was trying to say is this bill is typical future-ammo stuff done by both sides. Here is an example: I am a legislator and draw up a bill (the idea of which was probably pushed on me by a lobbyist). I call it the Justice for Pedophile Victims Act. The bulk of the bill talks about harsh punishments for pedophiles, one strike and you're out, life in jail, that kind of thing. But there is a little clause in there that says that at trial the pedophile victims have to come face-to-face with the pedophile and describe in detail what happened to them and be subject to the pedophile's lawyer's cross examination. I know my opponents are all for harsh punishments but don't want to subject the victims to that kind of trauma in court, so I know they will vote no. Then when election time comes I can say my opponent voted against the Justice for Pedophile Victims Act and thus must want to let peophiles walk the street. I know this is not true, but I knew they would vote no due to wording that left out would have changed their vote.
It's all politics and it happens all the time.
Terrible debate! Jim was not direct or specific enough in his ...sm
questions and allowed too much of the same old retoric from both candidates.
George's Interview with her on this specific subject
I think she's on drugs...or else she's ready to run for president...or else she trying to undermine O before he even gets going. Watch and see. Good heavens, she's going off the deep end. She's a big mouth, as is Barney Fife, Harry Reid, and the others. They've been trying to run this country since before the bailout. If O is smart, he'll soon shut them all up.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/01/pelosi-defends.html
Aacks Cyndiee - I guess I should have been more specific
in my message because I've read a lot of your posts and I agree with you most of the time.
There are however other people who don't watch a variety and only listen to the words of Olberman and Matthews and don't even listen to O'Reilly or Limbaugh but put them down. Those are whom I was talking about.
You have always presented yourself very well versed in a lot of different topics and sometimes I wish I could articulate myself as well.
Say what?? I am talking about a specific person whom I personally think...sm
is over-the-top, an embarrasmment to the President in many ways because of her ultra-liberal stance, but I am not "bashing" any Democrats, Republicans, or anyone else in particular here except Ms. Pelosi herself, and I was trying put a teensy tiny bit of humor on the board, sorry I did not pass it by you first, and you make no sense here because I am generally Democratic, not that that has anything to do with this?????? Wow, I honestly gave you more credit for intelligence and fairness than that.
If there already exist specific written policies
pertaining to personal workspace adornment (size, number and/or appropriateness of photographs, posters, banners, political content, sports memorabilia, etc.) then I would agree with you. If you don't like the policy, don't work there. Your office is not your personal gallery.
If the company doesn't want somebody hanging up a Soviet flag, then they're probably going to have to prohibit Old Glory as well.
However, if this is a policy formulated on the spur of the moment to appease a complainer, then I disagree. What's next? An Ohio State fan complaining about a Michigan pennant in the next cubicle?) Nor do I agree that new policies should be formulated after the fact to deal with an existing situation just because nobody foresaw it. If it's an important issue, then a rule should already cover it.
If this is a public area (waiting room/reception area) then I am sure the company must have had the foresight to write a standard regarding decor, since all visitors will see this. In my opinion, if it ain't covered in that policy, it should be okay.
Interesting that people voluntarily come to this country, going to considerable effort to get here, then so easily become offended and need special accommodations. What is it they don't understand about "liberty"? If an American coworker complained about the Ugandan flag in a neighboring workspace, there would be h*ll to pay! Disciplinary action against the complainer. Law suits! ACLU involvement! Paid leave and free counseling for the Ugandan employee to get over the trauma of the event!
Don't know which board or which specific Iranian you're referring to.
If you want me to read something, then post it, so I can, but please don't suggest that I go on some kind of wild goose chase on some other unnamed *board* for a post by some unnamed *Iranian.* I simply don't have that kind of time.
If you don't think the Iranian president is nuts, then blame the media and the administration because that's he way he's been portrayed by both, and his actions sure suggest that he is. Please post his redeeming qualities as you see them.
I posted this because I thought it was humorous, yet dead on accurate in the way a lot of Americans feel.
Get the picture? 
It is not the same at all, not picking on a specific group,race, or ethnicity....sm
as a matter of fact, some of my worst dictators are AMERICAN, they hate dictating and so act like little kids and speed talk, trip all over their words, slur everything together, mispronounce without correcting themselves, chew, burp, rattle papers and x-rays, etc., and then will correct several paragraps because they "forgot" this or that. At least foreign docs have an excuse, and many try to enuniciate clearly, spell things, out, etc. There is no comparison here...complaining about high percentage of difficult docs in your queue is not the same as drawing a "cartoon" that points directly in one direction, is poorly disguised, and is dispersed and disseminated in a national, hugely circulated newpaper.
Bible
I don't believe I ever stated that the bible supports abortion, if i did, that was a typo. I said that Christ did not teach on homosexuality, yet Christians can be quick to judge homosexuals.
I do not believe that the bible says one way or another, though abortion has been practiced for 1000s of years by midwives through the use of herbs.
As far as my belief in the bible, I don't believe every written word in the bible is the ispired word of God. It has been translated (and changed) by humans through the years to suit their needs. For many years, only the wealthy could read (and women generally were not allowed to), so the scriptures have been misinterpreted (in my opinion) often. I have studied Latin to try to gain some meaning from more ancient texts, but I truly believe that much of the bible is a praise work (as in the psalms) and historical, but not 100% the word of God.
Bible
• The Antichrist comes after a falling away or apostasy. (2 Thessalonians 2:3)
- At times forbids marriage (1 Timothy 4:3)
- At times commands not to eat certain foods that God says are ok to eat. (1 Timothy 4:3-5)
- Has other teachings that are devilish (1 Timothy 4:1; Acts 8:20; 1 John 3:8, 4) |
• The Antichrist is revealed before the second coming of Jesus. (2 Thessalonians 2:1-3) |
• The Antichrist has a visible leader. (Acts 20:30; 2 Thessalonians 2:4; Daniel 7:8) |
• The Antichrist comes from within the church. (Acts 20:30; 2 Thessalonians 2:4) |
• and then takes up residence in the church (2 Thessalonians 2:4) |
• The Antichrist rules for a long period of time. (Revelation 13:5, 12:6, 12:14; Daniel 7:25) |
• The Antichrist receives its power from the Devil. (Revelation 13:2; Revelation 12:9) |
• The Antichrist blasphemes God. (Revelation 13:5-6; Daniel 7:8,20,25) |
• The Antichrist tries to change God's law. (Daniel 7:25) |
• The Antichrist persecutes the people who keep God's law. (Revelation 13:2, 12:17, 14:12; Daniel 7:21) |
• The persecution diminishes prior to the end of the Antichrist's rule. (Matthew 24:22) |
• The Antichrist's long rule comes to an end. (Revelation 13:3) |
• The Antichrist again regains power and prestige. (Revelation 13:3) |
• The Antichrist deceives people around the world into worshipping it. (Revelation 13:3) |
• Another forces people to worship the Antichrist. (Revelation 13:11-12) |
• Miracles are used to deceive people into worshipping the Antichrist. (Revelation 13:13-14) |
• Some resist the authority of the Antichrist so economic sanctions are then used. (Revelation 13:16) |
• Some people still resist and a death decree is brought against them. (Revelation 13:15) |
• The Antichrist has a mark of authority that must be avoided at all costs. (Revelation 13:16-17, 14:9-10) |
"I think everyone had better get out their Bible
AIN'T IT THE TRUTH????
where in the bible does it say
abortion is wrong? Don't give me the murder crap, where does it actually say ABORTION is wrong? Abortion has been going on since the beginning of time and I am pretty sure there was plenty of it going on in biblical times, yet I don't recall seeing it mentioned ANYWHERE in the bible.
The Bible for one.......... sm
and I believe I have a responsibility to uphold its laws above and beyond upholding the right of perverts to access p*rn in the library while my child happens to see it.
I do believe morality has flown right out the window here. I think I need a shower now after participating in this thread with you.
Says who? Your bible, which is nothing more than
(no pun intended, of course)
no I don't. I believe the Bible is the sm
literal word of God and I believe it from front to back. There is a difference between reading a book and "studying" a book.
The Bible
is the only recognized source of even a knowledge of God. None of us would even know God if it weren't for the Bible. You go ahead and believe that. I'm not going to be in your corner.
look beyond your Bible, so that you can
see what is going on in the REAL world, not in the BIBLE WORLD.
Bible not bad book at all...
...and should have its basic tenets taught right alongside of those of the Qur'an and the holy books of all other major world religions. Students of any age who wish to read the Bible in my opinion should certainly be able to do so anytime they wish. Same for all other holy/religious writings. A person's education really isn't complete without a fundamental understanding of all of the religions that shape our world.
I would however sign any petition that forces anyone to do anything in the spirit of indoctrination or exclusion, or against any requirement that implies that THIS is the one true holy book and you WILL read it even if your negligent atheist going-to-hell-parents wouldn't force you to do it at home (and we're coming for them soon too - better join us if you know what's good for you). Unfortunately that is how this kind of requirement is perceived by many people in our current political climate - including me. And unfortunately, I believe this is exactly the attitude held by those who try to force such requirements into the public schools.
I don't think it qualifies as a "random act of kindness" - but rather as a deliberate act of religious supremacism.
The Bible says he did not "know" her
until after Jesus was born. What's your point?
If you truly have read the Bible then you know...
God makes no distinction for sin and lumps it all together except in a very few cases where the word *abomination* is attached, and homosexuality is one of those things. So I was not comparing a homosexual and a killer...I was comparing sins. And yes, we do sin, all of us, every day, and will have to account for that some day. But calling it other than a sin does not make it so, at least in my book. I did not call homosexuality an abomination...God did. So take your argument to Him. I choose to believe what He said. I do not hate anyone, I do not treat gays any differently than anyone else as fellow human beings. I have been lied to, stolen from...I don't hate those people, but I don't condone what they did. However, I do not condone homosexuality, any more than I condone lying, stealing, murder or any other sin. You can love an individual but not approve of the sin. That is what, I believe, treating others as you would be treated means. Treat the person with dignity without condoning the behavior. I don't believe in abortions, but I do not condone blowing up abortion clinics or shooting abortion doctors. I do not believe in changing laws to accept aberrant behavior, and we seem to keep trying to go down that road. Years ago, you are right...premarital sex did go on, but it was called what it was...a sin and something that should not be done. No longer the case. Same with homosexuality...it has gone on since time immemorial. But it was called wrong. There used to be laws against it in the US. No longer the case. What next? Polygamy? Bestiality? Necromancy? You say that could never happen here. Thirty years ago your parents probably would never have thought that adultery would be celebrated as entertainment news, premarital sex celebrated on prime time TV, and gay marriage becoming law. Just be careful what you wish for. You just might get it. We have experienced a big moral decline in this country and frankly, it did not begin with conservative Americans.
My opinion only...don't attack all conservatives for what I say. Opinions differ. That is mine.
What does Nostradamus have to do with the bible? sm
Besides, wasn't what Nostradamus wrote so vague that it could be interpreted to 'predict' anything and everything... or nothing at all, depending on how it was interpreted?
Read your Bible. The
antichrist will come from Rome or EU. Obama as the antichrist is absurd.
Uh, last I checked, the Bible said
to help those less fortunate than you, NOT those who just don't want to work but just want to collect money from the government for doing nothing.
VOTING ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE
I AGREE.
Like the Bible says...."many shall come in my name..."
saying you are a Christian does not make you one.
I don't read the bible
And I don't want to.
Don't get me wrong. I've read it. I decided at a pretty young age that it's a fairy tale that for the most part was written by a lot of people who weren't around when Jesus was & that didn't have all that much to do with reality. If it works for you, fine. I don't need to read in some book what the right thing to do is, & I don't assign any particular importance to Jesus. I find it irritating, condescending and naive for someone to suggest that I should "know Jesus" and have my life saved.
It's possible to think all of the above and still be a moral person, & what makes a lot of (not all) Christians narrow-minded is their belief that this isn't so, but they unfortunately can't see this from the narrow place from which they operate. Do I believe in God? I believe in the godhead; the life force; the force that drives the green shoot up, as Dylan Thomas would say; the inferno of activity in the nucleus of every cell... Do I believe this life force manifests as a person? Sure I do. The godhead is in everyone. Jesus didn't have any more of a hotline to the godhead than any of us has. The thing that makes a lot of (not all) Christians narrow-minded is their belief that "God" only speaks "Christian." This concept is too ridiculous for words. The godhead "speaks" every religious "language." I put this into quotes because I specifically don't personify the godhead; i.e., the godhead doesn't "do" the same things that a human body does, though in this instance it's a fairly good metaphor.
I believe that everything -- EVERYTHING -- came from the godhead. Because I'm not a Christian, I don't believe in "The devil," who is a big enough part of that religion that you really must accept the existence of the devil if you want to be Christian, & I don't think that kind of polarization is healthy, nor do I have any compulsion to externalize/personify every human impulse into a creature with horns or one that sits on a cloud or whatever. The universe creates trying, challenging scenarios of all sorts, which in the interest not just of survival but of enlightenment are our tasks to address, understand, & solve, & these would include ALL forms of religious extremism.
The bible is a book that simply doesn't interest me. There are spiritual books that do interest me for their complexity and illumination, but I don't need to live my life by any of them, & I don't need any of them to be a moral or spiritual person.
There are many religions much, much older than Christianity. The godhead was here long before any of it (& believe me, it was longer than 4000 years) & we as a species did not only obtain the capacity for enlightenment after the bible was written or after Jesus arrived.
If you "love Jesus," great. Go for it. Just don't end a conversation with some smug, proselytizing last word that in the end is just a way to think you are superior.
bible quotes
Yes, I am fairly familiar with Old Testament, in Hebrew, but thank you. The Psalm was written by David, not by G-d. As for Jeremiah, yes G-d does know our souls, before we are even human.
Not sure what Bible you are reading........... sm
but the quote I posted (paraphrased) is actually attributed to Joseph Dunniger. Correctly quoted, it reads "For those who believe, no explanation is necessary; for those who do not believe, no explanation will suffice."
Talk about needing to check one's sources! 
I am squeezing my Bible right now
because it is MY right to stay right here in AMERICA and squeeze my Bible ALL I WANT WHEREVER I WANT. I am also allowed to demand that PORN is not freely visible in public to my children. sex is a natural way of life SURE but that doesnt mean I want my 11 year old little girl around it. A u a MORON? What if some guy is at the library and decides to flash his nudeness in public showing all his glory? Is that OKAY TOO? May as well be. Seeing a naked person on line while walking by a computer in the library with my 11 year old is no different than seeing it in person in the library. GET A GRIP and stop trying to take MY rights away. I believe in Jesus and I am saved and I read the Bible and TRY to live by it and that is MY RIGHT. 
But the bible is not the same as the constitution
But the bible is not the same as the constitution
Nobody is stopping you from living my biblical precepts. And nowhere have I heard of any attempt to force churches to perform marriage ceremonies (interesting word- ceremony, but I degress). But I was under the impression that one of the critical differences between the USA and almost any Middle Eastern country is that we base our laws on civil liberties rather than letting religion be our guide. There are a lot of things mentioned in the bible forbids that we routinely do- I can't tell you when I last had the sabbath off, nor can I tell you when I last got to stone a harlot. My then widowed father did not step in to marry my aunt when her husband died and zoning laws prevent me from keeping a fattened calf in the garage.
My religious beliefs may not be in keeping with your religious beliefs, and neither one of us should be expected to live our life according to the other's.
I don't know about the catholic Bible sm
but have you ever really sat down and read your Bible or are you depending on a priest to interpret for you. You should sit down with your Bible and pray for the Holy Spirit to reveal his word to you.
The Bible calls
homosexual acts an "abomination." Look it up. It means "something to be hated." God tells us to hate that act. We obviously do not serve the same God. Mine teaches me to love all men and to hate sin such as homosexual acts. I believe you missed my point. Of course, it is possible to hate the sin and love the sinner but NOT if you are a member of the homosexual community. Once again, an opinion is not a judgement and it is a fact that homosexuality is abominable, ergo, disgusting if you worship the same God I do as I believe what He says. Of course, I have sinned. And I do not expect others to accept my sins as well and good. I don't even do that myself, so why should I accept that homosexuality is a good thing? My point is....We all sin, me included. You are not to accept my sin as good even though I may label myself as the sin I commit. You are not to hate me because of my sin but only hate my sin. People who commit homosexual acts and call themselves homosexuals would have us accept that sin because that is "who" they are not their sin. I don't think it's that difficult to understand.
Nowhere in the Christian bible
However, that did not limit the carnage done in the name of Christianity either. Jews and protestant ''heretics'' and suspected heretics had some fairly unpleasant things done to them in the name of God. Nor did it prevent the harm done to the indigenous peoples of this continent. KKK members often cloak what they believe and do in terms of God's ''natural order.'' Nazis were mostly Lutheran and Catholic.
Christianity, despite its well-published ''love one another'' philosophy, has been a fairly violent religion in the past. None of these misapplications of religion speak for all of Christianity. However, there has often been a fairly vocal Christian contingent denouncing these atrocities.
Religion is good for good people and bad for bad people. It can elevate the human spirit or be used to justify the most horrendous actions against others who do not share our particular vision of the almighty. Radical Muslems are just the current bad practitioners.
don't you agree that the Bible itself contains a lot
of gaps and 'mytserious', unexplained, downright illogical happenings?
The Bible gives us stories
about the beginning of time. It doesn't give us every story of every incident that took place or of all the things that God created. If it did, we would have a book so huge and thick we couldn't even turn the pages. Some have a tendency to believe that brothers slept with sisters to populate the earth since Adam and Eve were the only human beings on earth at that time. I tend not to think so as I believe God may have created other humans in different parts of the big world. Adam and Eve were the FIRST humans He created. There is no mention that they were the ONLY ones He created. Maybe Adam and Eve were the only ones to be recorded because they were the first. You never know and since you don't know, you can't determine that it isn't the case.
|
